In the world of work, there are always mismatches of various types. If there is a new industry, for which new skills are required, then, it’s normal to have a mismatch between what the industry wants in terms of skills and what is available from the human capital side. That is said to be normal, at least for some time, until it adjusts, as labor economists would say. On the other hand, only in a utopian world, every single employee is satisfied and happy at the workplace.

But, when the imbalance is persistently high and widespread globally, no doubt that even labor economists look for some answers.

For many years, employers worldwide have voiced concerns about the lack of certain skills among employees and potential hires. News reports usually frame this as companies struggling to find the talent they need¹. Similarly, for many years, according to Gallup, the percentage of employees, worldwide, who are dissatisfied at work, is high. Or, flipping the coin, only around 20% of employees are engaged globally (23% for the year 2024).

                                                          ***

You’re probably thinking: there isn’t always a direct relationship between one’s career choice and job dissatisfaction. In other words, some might be unhappy because of a variety of reasons such as low salary or misalignment with the manager (people quit managers, not companies, so they say) and not because they picked the wrong field. Indeed, that explains part of the issue, but not all cases. According to an OECD study, field-of-study mismatch explains lower levels of satisfaction at work.

                                                         ***

Are we missing something? Are employers (or potential ones) complaining too much?  Are employees (or potential ones) being too capricious and not putting enough effort?

Or,

Are many youngsters or even mid-career folks not having a more comprehensive perspective when choosing or developing their careers?

                                                        ***

This is kind of a confession.  Around 2010, after following Ken Robinson’s books, who is not exactly a believer in personality tests as a foundation for career choice [he believes there are as many personality types as people in this planet], myself, I became very skeptical about such tests. In fact, I became skeptical not only about personality tests, but, ironically to what Ken Robinson would have expected, also about introspection as the basis for one’s choice. Instead, I became a strong believer that the only thing that should matter was to focus on the skills that the labor market – or, industry rather to say – is desperate for. Then, the following conclusion seemed obvious to me. In this age of abundant information, choosing a career should be straightforward. I mean, there’s no lack of credible information about the most in demand skills in any given year (past, present, and even future), and almost in any given country. Wouldn’t one secure their future by choosing one or more of those high-demand skills??

I had adopted the other extreme, and become a one-sided person myself. 

After some more years, witnessing plenty of stories, I also came to understand that this practical approach doesn’t seem to be one-size-fits-all recipe. I mean, the skills-only perspective works for many, but, for various reasons, it doesn’t for many others.  It carries the risk of dissatisfaction and disengagement at work, down the road.

It’s not that I no longer believe in the importance of skills. Actually, after years of study and reflection, combined with the fact that since 2015 I’ve been in the recruitment industry (ergo, first-hand witness of what companies want), I came to the confirmation that skills matter. And they matter a lot.

I was just missing a holistic understanding.

                                                            ***

And to add more complexity (or maybe to decrease complexity?), Generative AI comes, bringing with it the ongoing debate between ‘AI-will-kill-your-job’ believers and technology optimists.

There are some 7,500 jobs titles mapped by the OECD/Ilo. After some grouping, we are left with around 430 occupations. O*NET², broadly used by academia and a bunch of international institutions and companies, captures more than 700 occupations.

So, how should one choose or develop a career in this age of global mismatches, abundant information, skills, generative AI, and so forth?

How that choice should go around in a globalized world – where, for whatever reason, chances of you migrating to a different country are higher?

I believe it is time for a fresh perspective!

———————————————————————

1. There’s a different view to why companies cannot find the talent they want. In words of Peter Cappelli – in his book Why Good People Can’t Get Jobs – employers are demanding more of candidates than ever before or & and are not being able or willing to pay the market price for talent. Indeed, as a recruiter I’ve witnessed some companies’ capriciousness, looking for the unicorn candidate or offering ridiculous salaries. But I have also seen and read a lot about the other side: many companies indeed cannot easily find certain kind of candidates, even offering more than decent salaries.

2. O*NET – Occupational Information Network- is a U.S.A database providing detailed descriptions of occupations, skills, and labor market trends to support career exploration, workforce development, and job matching